Vineland backs off utility power agreement

VINELAND - The city has decided not to join a collective purchasing power agreement with several other state municipalities, but may revisit the deal later this year.

Citing a need to collect additional information and negotiate more favorable terms for Vineland, City Council at their Dec. 27 meeting voted down an ordinance that would have allowed the Vineland Municipal Electric Utility to join a recently established public power authority and collectively purchase electricity.

The 3-1 vote against the shared services deal came after city officials said they needed more information before making such a commitment to an authority still in its infancy.

“In its current form, the majority of council felt it did not receive enough information in regards to making a proper decision,” said Mayor Anthony Fanucci, then-City Council president at the time of the vote. “It does not mean we will not revisit this and look at this in the future and to look for its benefits.”

Fanucci and others said the ordinance may be reintroduced this year after officials gather the additional information they need.

Specifically, officials are concerned with the authority’s unfilled leadership positions as well as Vineland’s voting power.

“We had a lot of questions that needed to be answered,” City Solicitor Richard Tonetta said. “Quite frankly, the most important one was the weighted vote. We represent 50 percent of the whole organization — why would we not have a weighted vote in terms of what should or should not happen?”

Tonetta suggested that giving Vineland a weighted vote was a non-starter for the authority.

“They’re not going to change that part of the bylaws at this point, and the reason being, in order to do so, they would have to go to every municipality that approved it and redo the bylaws,” he said.

According to Tonetta, the city was looking to establish a weighted vote not just for Vineland, but for every municipality. In that case, each member's vote would be based off the size of their respective generation power, he said.

“Some of the other larger municipalities would have a larger vote as well,” Tonetta said of the city’s proposal.

If passed, Vineland would have joined with nine other New Jersey electric utilities, as well as one rural electric cooperative, as part of an authority allowing for group purchasing power that supporters say could secure lower electricity prices for consumers.

The authority was formed in October after the interested parties were asked by the Local Finance Board to introduce their own ordinances establishing their interest.

That gave the board the green light to approve the authority, and all nine have since signed on, according to Tonetta.

Asked whether Vineland’s reluctance holds up anything for the other members, Tonetta said, “It does not hold up the other municipalities — they can go ahead, the authority’s already been formed. Whether Vineland goes with them or not is not relevant to the creation of the authority.”

The city first introduced its ordinance in September and opened it up for a public hearing.

A bit of disconnect in information on the part of the Ruben Bermudez administration, including a months-long delay in his approval of an attorney versed in public purchasing power, led to it being held up for awhile, according to officials.

That attorney, Bergen County lawyer Ryan Scerbo, eventually was hired in November.

“We were kind of put behind the 8 ball for awhile there,” Tonetta said of the delay.

Fanucci, now mayor, said he plans to look at the prospect again in his administration.

“This is something that was sprung on this council … and we felt that we didn’t get sufficient answers, and we don’t necessarily think it’s a bad thing but we want to make sure the decision we make is going to be in the best interest of Vineland and its ratepayers,” he said. “So I am open to dialog on this moving forward.”